Not a 'supermoon'....but a 5 second shot of the ISS passing almost directly between my location and Saturn. Had I been up the road a mile in mosquito country, it would have done just that, but Saturn would not have shown on the shot.

As an aside, I'm an amateur astronomer/astrophotographer and like many of my compadres, I don't care for the term 'supermoon'. Visually, it looks like every other full moon you'll ever see (except an eclipse).

A friend called and wanted to shoot the Supermoon. I was hesitant to go but gave in. I grabbed what was avail; 5D2 & 70-200 Mk I, which I use for lightning shots since I'm not too concerned if they get wet. So, the moon pops out for a few minutes, then comes a light drizzle causing all of the other togs to scatter. Then it ducks under a cloud. So here is my shot, It got "Explored". I wish I'd grabbed the 5D3 & 70-200 Mk II, as my friend had his D800E & 70-200.But there goes the saying:"The Best Camera You Have is the One with You"To me, its a little soft, but I got the shot. 2013 Supermoon Eclipse from NYC [Explored] by Strykapose, on Flickr

Nice shot. What was the shooting location if I might ask. West of Javits Center?

interesting fact for astronomers.. but doesn´t help a bit to make better images of the moon.

Correct, I have been an amateur astronomer for nearly 20 years, and I didn't even go outside to look because I knew that it wasn't particularly visually interesting. Having said that, I must say that the photo next to the Empire State Building by strykapose is incredible.

A couple of other quick tidbits about imaging the moon:

The most interesting photos of the moon occur at phases other than the full moon (unless you create a stunning scene like the photo of the moon next to the Empire State Building). That is because when there is a partial moon, the sun hits the craters at angles rather than straight on, so the resulting shadows highlight the craters. With a full moon, the sunlight is almost at the same angle as our visual angle, so there aren't many shadows to highlight. Because of that, I am guessing that the first photo in this thread is a mosaic or blending of a couple of photos taken over a couple of days (which perhaps the OP stated). Otherwise, I don't see how you would be able to see shadows in the craters on both sides of the moon so clearly.

Serious lunar imagers actually use webcams rather than DSLRs so that they can get a large number of frames (sometimes hundreds) and merge the best images together with stacking/processing programs. I would love to attempt this but haven't yet.

If you do use a DSLR, it takes a fair amount of practice to get the exposure right, because the moon is so bright compared to the dark sky background. HDR can be helpful, but even then it is often best to catch the moon when it is low in the sky and not as bright as when it gets above the atmosphere haze.

If you try to get more magnified images, having steady skies is critical. I suffer from a lot of shimmer where I live, so I can never get crisp images at high magnification. A lack of skill and experience doesn't help either Here is a mosaic (http://bartolini.zenfolio.com/img/s8/v85/p1661868389-6.jpg) that I attempted a few years ago with a 20D and a telescope as a lens. It could really use some photoshop help to get rid of the blocky sky background, but I didn't bother. If you want to see a serious mosaic from someone who really knows what they are doing, check this out: http://www.astronomie.be/bart.declercq/Moon_20100323.jpg